Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#6211
Calvinism is Biblical
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One day
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
2
1522
rating
10
debates
60.0%
won
Description
This debate will evaluate whether the theological system known as Calvinism is biblically supported. Calvinism, often summarized by the acronym TULIP, includes five core doctrines: Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints. These doctrines affirm God's absolute sovereignty in salvation, man's inability to choose God apart from grace, and the effectual nature of Christ's atoning work for the elect.
The Pro side will argue that Calvinism faithfully represents the teachings of Scripture concerning human nature, divine sovereignty, salvation, and grace. The Con side will argue that Calvinism either misrepresents or goes beyond what the Bible teaches, and that alternative interpretations (e.g., Arminianism, Molinism, or other soteriologies) align more closely with Scripture.
Definitions:
Calvinism: The Reformed theological system centered on God’s sovereign election and the doctrines of grace, particularly as articulated in the five points of Calvinism.
Biblical: Derived from or supported by the proper interpretation of the Bible.
Burden of Proof:
The burden is shared. Pro must demonstrate that the key doctrines of Calvinism are clearly taught in Scripture. Con must demonstrate that these doctrines are either not supported by Scripture or are contradicted by it.
Debate Structure (suggested):
Round 1: Opening arguments (no rebuttals).
Round 2: Rebuttals and defense.
Round 3: Further rebuttals and analysis.
Round 4: Final rebuttals and closing arguments (no new arguments).
Rules:
Arguments must be grounded in Scripture. Appeals to church history, logic, or tradition are welcome but should not replace biblical support.
No forfeits. No trolling or semantics.
Citations of Scripture should include chapter and verse for verification.
This is a theological debate with eternal significance. Both sides are encouraged to engage respectfully, thoughtfully, and with a sincere commitment to truth.
Round 1
Pro
#1
Opening Argument: Calvinism Is Biblically Supported
Calvinism is not a man-made system forced onto Scripture. It is a faithful summary of what the Bible teaches about God’s sovereignty, human sin, and the nature of salvation. The five points of Calvinism, often called TULIP, are not isolated ideas. They form a coherent, biblical explanation of how God saves sinners and how He receives all the glory for doing so.
This argument will present each point with clear premises and a conclusion, all drawn from Scripture.
I. Total Depravity
Definition: Because of the fall, every part of human nature is corrupted by sin. People are spiritually dead and morally unable to come to God without divine intervention.
Premises:
- All people are born in sin (Psalm 51:5, Romans 5:12).
- No one naturally seeks God or does good (Romans 3:10–12).
- The natural human condition is spiritual death (Ephesians 2:1–3).
- Spiritual death means inability, not just unwillingness (John 6:44, where "no one can come" indicates a lack of ability).
Conclusion: Therefore, no one is able to come to God by their own will or power. Salvation must begin with God’s initiative.
II. Unconditional Election
Definition: God chooses whom He will save based on His own will and grace, not on anything foreseen in the person.
Premises:
- God chose individuals for salvation before the world began (Ephesians 1:4–5).
- His choice was not based on works or future decisions (Romans 9:11–13).
- Election is rooted in God's purpose and mercy, not human will (Romans 9:16, 18).
- Jesus told His disciples that they did not choose Him, but He chose them (John 15:16).
Conclusion: Therefore, election is based on God’s sovereign will alone, not on human effort or foreseen faith.
III. Limited Atonement (or Particular Redemption)
Definition: Christ’s death secured actual salvation for a specific people. It was sufficient for all but intended to effectively save the elect.
Premises:
- Jesus came to save His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21).
- He laid down His life specifically for His sheep (John 10:14–15).
- He gave Himself for the Church, not indiscriminately for all (Ephesians 5:25).
- If Christ died for all in the same way, all would be saved. Yet Scripture teaches that some will face judgment, which means Christ's death must have a particular intention.
Conclusion: Therefore, Christ’s atonement was designed to actually and effectively save the elect, not merely make salvation a possibility.
IV. Irresistible Grace
Definition: When God calls someone inwardly by the Holy Spirit, that call results in a willing response. God changes the heart so that the person desires Christ.
Premises:
- All whom the Father gives to the Son will come to Him (John 6:37).
- No one can come unless the Father draws them (John 6:44).
- Those whom God calls are also justified (Romans 8:30), which means the call is effectual.
- God opened Lydia’s heart to respond to Paul’s preaching (Acts 16:14), which shows that saving grace acts directly on the heart.
Conclusion: Therefore, God’s saving call cannot fail. When He draws someone, they come to faith because their heart has been changed.
V. Perseverance of the Saints
Definition: All true believers will remain in the faith until the end, not because of their own strength but because God keeps them.
Premises:
- Those who are justified will be glorified. No one falls out along the way (Romans 8:30).
- Jesus said He will lose none of those the Father has given Him (John 6:39).
- No one can snatch believers out of God’s hand (John 10:28–29).
- Those who fall away were never truly born again (1 John 2:19).
Conclusion: Therefore, all true believers will persevere because God sustains them. Salvation is secure because it is God’s work from beginning to end.
Con
#2
I am not a fan of making it out as if Eve eating an apple somehow means everything in human nature is sinful and evil.
It is hardly biblical to believe we are purely evil scum and the only way to Jesus is fighting entirely against ourselves. That sounds a lot more like Islam, which Calvinism actually shares a lot with.
Jesus spends many speeches and verses calling to our innate nature and yearning for the love of God. Calvinists are almost Gnostic heretics implying we are trapped in evil bodies and must hate our nature.
Should we never dance, never sing, never smile?
Calvinists confuse the flesh and our tendency towards sinning in general to mean all human nature is sinful. This then means that they can say there is no possible way even within 'free will' (which Calvinists very heretically deny exists) to get saved; it is purely God's predestination to save or not save.
This is so blatantly false. Adam and Eve sinned because they prioritised the urge for the apple over their relationship with God. Calvinism says God predestined/predetermined the sin. Then Adam and Eve becomes a so-called sin of God which negates it being a sin.
What is Calvinism and what is the Thomist alternative?
Calvinism, also known as Reformed Christianity, is a branch of Protestantism originating in the 16th century, primarily associated with the teachings of John Calvin.It emphasizes the sovereignty of God, the authority of the Bible, and covenant theology, a framework for understanding God's relationship with humanity through covenants.
Google AI.
It cites:
And more.
Thomism is a vast array of theoroes made by Thomas Aquinas and the part in most direct opposition to Calvinism states:
In Thomistic theology, salvation is achieved through a combination of divine grace and human cooperation, ultimately leading to theosis, or union with God. While God initiates the process with grace, individuals must actively respond, making use of the infused grace to perform acts of love and obedience, ultimately growing in Christ-likeness and achieving eternal life.Here's a more detailed breakdown:
Google AI
It cites
Divine Sovereignty:Calvinism emphasizes God's complete and absolute control over all things, including salvation.Predestination:
The doctrine that God has already chosen who will be saved, and this choice is not based on human merit or actions.Total Depravity:
The belief that human nature is corrupted by sin and that humans are unable to choose God on their own.Limited Atonement:
The belief that Christ died only for the sins of those whom God has chosen to save.Irresistible Grace:
The belief that God's grace will inevitably lead those who are elected to salvation.Perseverance of the Saints:
The belief that once someone is saved, they will persevere in faith and cannot lose their salvation.
Google AI
====
Predestination to Hell
This is not remotely Biblical. This is made up entirely by John Calvin. It is also a severe contradiction to God being all loving and hoping everyone accepts his grace and gets saved.
As this is a 5-Round debate and I am short on time, I will use Google AI to help rush this as all I can do is reword the identical anyway:
1 Timothy 2:4:This verse clearly states that God's desire is for all people to be saved and to come to a full understanding of the truth.2 Peter 3:9:
This verse emphasizes God's patience and longsuffering, stating that He is not slow in fulfilling His promises but is rather "long-suffering toward you, not wanting anyone to perish, but wanting everyone to come to repentance".Ezekiel 18:23:
This passage asserts that God does not delight in the death of the wicked but desires their conversion and life.Matthew 23:37:
This verse expresses God's sorrow over the people of Jerusalem and His desire for them to be gathered together, similar to a hen gathering her chicks.
Sources Google uses:
And many more.
Thomism in contrast suggests the mechanics is this:
Essentially God did predestine some saved sort of. Mary would be a blatant most severe example. Jesus is fully God so not clear cut if he counts a predestined saved human as he is also fully human. On the other hand, for almost all the rest of us if you reject God, very little can be done by him without interfering with Free Will.
God could not possibly predestine people to.Hell biblically give the verses stated and analysed by Google AI (I will expand with my own words in later Rounds.
====
Once saved always saved (OSAS)
This sheer arrogance of Calvinists says that basically since God is predestining saved and unsaved once baptised and had a first communion you cannot go to Hell no matter what you do.
As a Calvinist tenet it is titled as 'Perseverence of Saints' but that misleads. It sounds as if you need to persevere. Instead they think you autopilot to Heaven as God chose yoy ro be saved and predetermined all actions you then take.
Yes. It is that insane and wrong, genuinely.
Thomism is rooted in and connected with Catholic thinking. It says Good Works matter and even hints at what Vatican II made blatant; for those who don't even know Christ at all to reject him (think people in severely remote islands or many regions of China etc that never get a shot at being Christian) where believing in a god fidmly and trying one's best to be disciplined and true may end up woth HS leading one anyway and end one in Heaven (this is not Thomism itself it is an extension).
Sola Fide (faith alone saving) is a hoax on its own but worse, OSAS is sheer anti-biblical arrogance.
This time I paste from a spurce prewritten by a human.
Italics are Bible quotes, non-Italics is not.
- Rev 2:5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.
How can you be saved without the light of God? Likewise, how can you lose the light of God, and yet be saved? Here Jesus is threatening to remove the 'candlestick' from the church unless they repented...and I don't think He makes idle threats.
- Rev 22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
This is the singular blockbuster verse of all verses that destroys the doctrine of OSAS. It's painfully obvious here that if you remove the words from the book of Revelation then YOU WILL have your part in the book of life removed, and you will not be in the holy city spoken of. Unless an OSAS believer is going to convert to believing in universalism, or some new age doctrine, then this verse is the cure-all for their heresy.
- Heb 3:12 Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God.
This verse takes care of the oft repeated verses from the OSASers that say "once God saves you, nobody can pluck you out of His hand" it's true that's what those verses say, but they are taken out of context and stretched into also saying that you have no free will and could not walk out yourself.
- 1Tim 4:1 Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.
Here we are told that some people shall depart from the faith. You cannot depart from something that you were never in. You can't depart from the Atlanta airport, if you were never in Atlanta.Eze 18:24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.
This is absolute proof that the righteous can turn from their righteousness, and that it's not merely "they were never saved to begin with".
I can expand in my own words later on all of this. For all you know I wrote it (I do deny that I am the owner of that source but I would lie, venial sin here not mortal, to protect my anonymity).
The rest of Calvinism is easier to dismiss later when I am allowed active rebuttals.
Round 2
Pro
#3
Thank you for your opening. This debate matters deeply, not just intellectually, but eternally. That’s why it's vital that we build our arguments on the foundation of Scripture, not on Google summaries, emotional appeals, or misrepresentations.
Let me now respond to your claims, clarify what Calvinism actually teaches, and show again why it is most faithful to the Word of God.
I. Misrepresentations of Calvinism
Claim: Calvinism teaches that humans are “pure evil scum,” like Gnosticism or Islam.
This is a straw man.
Calvinism teaches that humans are made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27), but that every part of our nature has been corrupted by sin (Genesis 6:5; Romans 3:10–12). This doesn’t mean people are as evil as possible, but that sin touches every part of us, mind, will, and heart. We affirm human dignity and the goodness of creation. The problem is spiritual death, not physical embodiment (Ephesians 2:1–3). That’s not Gnosticism, it’s Romans 5 and Ephesians 2.
Claim: Calvinists hate joy, beauty, or smiling.
This is irrelevant and false.
Calvinism teaches that true joy is found in Christ (John 15:11; Psalm 16:11). We affirm music, love, laughter, and human expression. But joy doesn’t negate sin’s seriousness or our need for grace. Misrepresenting us this way doesn’t move the debate forward.
II. Thomism Was Described, Not Defended from Scripture
Your defense of Thomism relied entirely on Google AI, Wikipedia, and generalized summaries. But the debate resolution is about whether Calvinism is biblically supported. You’ve yet to show that Thomism is more faithful to Scripture.
2 Timothy 3:16 says that all Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching. Where is the exegesis? Where are the texts that show salvation is a cooperation between man and grace, rather than a sovereign act of God? If Calvinism is to be rejected, it must be rejected with Scripture, not summaries.
III. Addressing Core Objections
1. Total Depravity and Free Will
You object that Calvinism denies free will. That depends on the definition.
Calvinism teaches that humans do what they want, but apart from grace, what we want is sin (John 3:19–20; Romans 8:7–8). Jesus said in John 6:44, “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him.” That’s not a Calvinist invention, it’s a divine truth. The will is free in one sense, but enslaved in another (Romans 6:17–18).
2. Predestination and God’s Love
You cited 1 Timothy 2:4, 2 Peter 3:9, Ezekiel 18:23, and Matthew 23:37 to argue that God wants all people saved, so Calvinism must be false.
But Romans 9 answers this tension directly:
“Though they were not yet born…in order that God’s purpose of election might continue…”
“So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God…”
“He has mercy on whomever He wills, and He hardens whomever He wills.”
God’s general desire for all to repent does not cancel His sovereign election of some. Scripture must interpret Scripture. The same God who says He desires repentance also says He prepared vessels of wrath for destruction (Romans 9:22).
3. Limited Atonement
You haven’t responded to the biblical case for particular redemption:
- John 10:15 – “I lay down my life for the sheep.”
- Matthew 1:21 – “He will save His people from their sins.”
- Ephesians 5:25 – “Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her.”
If Christ died for everyone equally, then why are not all saved? Scripture teaches that His death was effective for the elect.
4. Perseverance of the Saints
You claimed Calvinism teaches “autopilot to heaven,” but that’s false.
Philippians 1:6 – “He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion.”
John 10:28–29 – “No one will snatch them out of My hand.”
1 John 2:19 – “They went out from us, but they were not of us.”
Warnings like Hebrews 3:12 or Revelation 2:5 are real, but they are also the means God uses to preserve His people. Those who fall away never had saving faith to begin with.
IV. The Glory of Calvinism
You called Calvinism “insane,” “Gnostic,” “Islamic,” “arrogant,” and “anti-biblical.” But which view actually gives God all the glory?
“Salvation belongs to the Lord.” (Jonah 2:9)
“So that no human being might boast in the presence of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:29)
Calvinism does not distort Scripture, it submits to it. Even when it’s hard. Even when it challenges our assumptions. Because we believe God is wiser than we are.
Conclusion
In Round 1, I presented a structured, Scripture-driven case for Calvinism.
In Round 2, I have:
- Clarified misconceptions.
- Exposed the lack of biblical defense for Thomism.
- Responded to key objections with Scripture.
I welcome a deeper exegetical engagement in the next round. Calvinism stands because it is drawn from the whole counsel of God’s Word. Not from tradition. Not from philosophy. Not from Google. But from the Bible.
Con
#4
This Round will be done as rapid-fire rebuttals. 5 rounds leaves room for most complex defense later. I will defend against Pro saying Thomism is not Biblical but mainly aim at his Round 1.
Premises:God chose individuals for salvation before the world began (Ephesians 1:4–5).
Agreed. Irrelevant. Some were rigged to be saved. Zero were rigged to be unsaved. The anti-Calvinistic(Cal) stance is not that 0 saved got predestined/rigged. That is also very rare. Cals say everyone is predestined.
His choice was not based on works or future decisions (Romans 9:11–13).
Let us see the verses. I will use NIV translation, it is well renowned and non-Cath specific. Neutral territory.
Romans 9:9-159 For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.”[a]10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”[b] 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”[c]
I admit this is strange, unclear what is meant. However, I tell this, he predestines a minority of saved. He predestines no unsaved and Cals claim he predestines all. Finding 2 twins or something (I don't know this section very well, I am a newish convert)
Election is rooted in God's purpose and mercy, not human will (Romans 9:16, 18).
Okay this is like saying a subordinate working along with CEO interest means works of the employee don't matter. Do you see my point? You are saying being hired or fired is God's will alone but ignoring the works aspect.
Jesus told His disciples that they did not choose Him, but He chose them (John 15:16).
In the same verse he says 'so that you might go bear fruit'. Look at Judas. Just look at Judas. Think. Works do matter. Predestining is not happening how you think.
Conclusion: Therefore, no one is able to come to God by their own will or power. Salvation must begin with God’s initiative.
No. Again, this is like saying the hiring, firing, promotion and demotion are not wiofully eelected by the subordinate employee. Obviously that is true. That does not mean works and usage of free will are negated. I honestly do not get how Calvinists even see families.
In a family, you can be a son/daughterdoing good to/by your parents and ALSO be brother/sister doing bad during the same months of time? There are many elements. What you have no say in is your parents willed you to exist (please ignore extreme cases for this analogy to work). Do you not understand that?
You are seeing something correct, then ignoring what else is correct. It is up to us to work with God's will via Holy Spirit and adhering to his rules, traditions etc. We often must opt in at some point to be saved but ALWAYS choose to be damned by ignoring him. Even if it somehow was proven by Pro that it isnt always, it still is enough to negate Cal theorising. Cals do not use logic when interpreting the Bible on these matters, they read some verses and ignore ones that disprove them such as the ones claiming God wants everyone saved and is all-loving and all-good.
====
- Jesus came to save His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21).
- He laid down His life specifically for His sheep (John 10:14–15).
- He gave Himself for the Church, not indiscriminately for all (Ephesians 5:25).
- If Christ died for all in the same way, all would be saved. Yet Scripture teaches that some will face judgment, which means Christ's death must have a particular intention.
Conclusion: Therefore, Christ’s atonement was designed to actually and effectively save the elect, not merely make salvation a possibility.
So tell me, why isn't everyone saved? Did Father deny his Son's will in your logic? Is there a blasphemic domestic dispute going on?
Why did Jesus save the thief next to him on the Cross and deny the other? This is ironically used by YOUR SIDE to prove sola fide. The problem for you is it disproves the atonement aspect of Calvinism big time.
Luke 23:39-43New International Version39 One of the criminals who hung there hurled insults at him: “Aren’t you the Messiah? Save yourself and us!”40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[a]”43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”
Lutherans have more logic in their version of sola fide, which is still wrong, than Calvinists do in their OSAS and universal atonement nonsense.
====
IV. Irresistible GraceDefinition: When God calls someone inwardly by the Holy Spirit, that call results in a willing response. God changes the heart so that the person desires Christ.Premises:
- All whom the Father gives to the Son will come to Him (John 6:37).
- No one can come unless the Father draws them (John 6:44).
- Those whom God calls are also justified (Romans 8:30), which means the call is effectual.
- God opened Lydia’s heart to respond to Paul’s preaching (Acts 16:14), which shows that saving grace acts directly on the heart.
ooookay, stop right there. Father pulls everyone to him his grace is for all, I already showed the verses Round 1 such as the Timothy verse proving it.
What Calvinists primarily misinterpret is sime Ephesians verses. These verses mean the following:
Everyone can 'tune in' to Holy Spirit and welcome him inside them. With that, they gain more of an accyrate moral compass and becone temporarily immune to demons and Satan possessing them. The HS seeps out of them the less they fulfil it with prayer, good works, faith, hope (well this is shown by prayer) and more.
HS is the antidote and the helpijg spirit to.then guide you to Christ to then lead to Father's grace. Hell is for those that rejected Father, many reject him by rejecting the HS 'vibe' 'aura' guiding them to gravitate to Christ and then Father.
Round 3
Con
#6
Something to consider is this:
If God predestines all unsaved, what did the entire Christianity get invented for?
Jesus coming to us does not actually save us at all if God predestined all saved and unsaved regardless of it.
Calvinists such as Pro would have you believe that God literally rigs reality so that many reject him. They would have you believe that Hitler, who got baptised and confirmed Catholic and deconverted to some vague 'Church of Germany' is guaranteed heaven because of the perseverance of saints.
The way they think of Christianity is so warped that it may as well not be Christianity. Their faith in Christ is instead in a god that dooms many to Hell from the moment they were created. Then it is impossible to feel loved by the God, it is also impossible for your love to the God to matter because it would be aking to a blackmail or kidnap victim showing love to their abuser, in fact it would make our relationship with God be that of a child and its abusive father rather than healthily loving father.
Calvinism defies Christian principles to push its case. It cannot be biblically valid.
Round 4
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:
I don't actually think Con argued their case all that well. Nonetheless, they still win by default due to forfeiture.
Bring up Penal Substitutinary Atonement. It's extremely heretical and anti-trinitarian.
Thomas Aquinas is overrated AF.
That’s ignorant. Calvinism exalts Christ and His grace, Islam denies Him entirely. If you think they’re the same, you don’t understand either. I'll post my opening in a second.
Calvinists may as well be Muslims. I will prove how it does not work for Christianity.
I will back Thomism.
I suppose I could still debate you as well. I'll give the same opening argument I have for the other person if that's okay.
Yoy can ask users barney or whiteflame to delete it
Meant to privately set this up with another person.